Icopress ' Merit Source Application 🚩

[JollyGood]

Precisely. I do not have a problem with that because if there is no reason to scrutinise the manner in which merits are given by merit sources there is no reason to scrutinise the manner in which merits are given by non-merit source members too. I think if there is merit abuse between farmed accounts that should be addressed but other than that members are free to merit any post they like regardless of them being merit source or non-merit source.

Other than that I am not a huge fan of the merit system as it currently stands but that is a matter for a different time. Right now, I can see no reason why icopress is not a good candidate for merit source and hope theymos will keep him in mind the next time he selects a merit source.

Merit sources have a responsibility to give merits in an unbiased manner but can we really state as a matter of fact that has been the case throughout?

Merit sources are supposed to merit whatever they like. Be it a high quality post, a joke, or a newbie question. That's why we have more than a hundred merit sources; simply because there's no "universal unbiased standard".

[1714270253]

1714270253

[1714270253]

1714270253

[1714270253]

1714270253

[1714270253]

1714270253

[1714270253]

1714270253

[alani123]

But right now I know that there's an oversupply of merit.

Better have an oversupply than an undersupply. I think we have less merit sources comparably to last year, so if someone's going to replace this lack, be it icopress.

I respectfully disagree. If merit sources had too many posts to pick from and less merit they'd be more pressure on them to focus on actually good posts by good members so they can reward their efforts by making them rank up. Now there's so much merit going around from merit sources that most of it ends up being not utilized at all. And at best, there's huge merit circlejerks in the absence of new posters. Merit is so abundant that nearly no one cares about it anymore. Even in cases of abuse. In an ideal world there would be more admins to be looking through this every few weeks or so to remove or add merit sources accordingly based on how many new users are coming in. But on the contrary, for the last few years we've had an oversupply of merit. But now that we have too much of it, nearly no one cares. New users just find hacked accounts to rank their own accounts through local boards and it gets lost in the merit circlejerks of users that have already reached legendary rank.

[Rikafip]

D} with source merits he can boost a person to earn more = not true for icopress as I think is is not a source.

But manager can already do that by choosing whoever they want in the campaign so I don't see how that would change with more managers being merit sources.

It has been claimed a source already is a campaign manager there was a post that said this.

Yes there is.

If true It is a conflict of interest and that person should surrender  his source for the good of bitcointalk.

theymos obviously doesn't think so and in the end he is the only one whose opinion matter in this case really.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I respectfully disagree. If merit sources had too many posts to pick from and less merit they'd be more pressure on them to focus on actually good posts by good members so they can reward their efforts by making them rank up.

I'll speak for myself. If I had less sMerits, I'd simply do what I had been doing before I become a merit source; merit the same posts, but with less merits. I don't feel like I have more pressure on meriting "good posts" now that I'm merit source. Whenever I find an interesting post, I simply merit it. That's all, and I'd say I'm biased to an extent to newbie posts, because I want to encourage them continue their journey and rank up.

But on the contrary, for the last few years we've had an oversupply of merit. But now that we have too much of it, nearly no one cares.

The whole point of the merit system is mainly to discourage shitposts. Even with an oversupply of merits, it still fits that purpose. It's just that high-quality posters get merited more generously and/or regularly.

New users just find hacked accounts to rank their own accounts through local boards and it gets lost in the merit circlejerks of users that have already reached legendary rank.

I certainly wouldn't rather to help a user who sees the forum as a milking cow instead of an Internet board, rank up. Why am I the one to blame and not them for being incapable to produce somewhat medium quality content?

[alani123]

I respectfully disagree. If merit sources had too many posts to pick from and less merit they'd be more pressure on them to focus on actually good posts by good members so they can reward their efforts by making them rank up.

I'll speak for myself. If I had less sMerits, I'd simply do what I had been doing before I become a merit source; merit the same posts, but with less merits. I don't feel like I have more pressure on meriting "good posts" now that I'm merit source. Whenever I find an interesting post, I simply merit it. That's all, and I'd say I'm biased to an extent to newbie posts, because I want to encourage them continue their journey and rank up.

I'm quite certain many people have the same approach now, but things work differently on a macro and on a micro level.
The macro level is that if everyone has less sMerits and there were far fewer merit sources, the result of having less merit to go around would be that the responsibility on spotting and rewarding good posts increases.

I certainly wouldn't rather to help a user who sees the forum as a milking cow instead of an Internet board, rank up. Why am I the one to blame and not them for being incapable to produce somewhat medium quality content?

Precisely because there's a lack of new users with good posts I believe that we don't need new merit sources. At this point in my opinion new merit sources should only happen if less active ones are removed and their sMerits rescinded. When forum activity from new users goes down merit sources should ideally decrease, not increase.

[uchegod-21]

Honestly, I don't doubt Icopress's objectivity because he is an old member who has contributed a lot to this forum, but with him as a merit source there is the possibility:

Objectivity has nothing to do with forum age. A newbie can just arrive the forum, read the rules, understand them and be more objective than someone who is here for 4 years.

~ As a selling point and perhaps sending more merit to the client's account

Most of his clients are project owners who does not make posts day in day out. Even if he sends just a merit to enable his clients upload images, that's not a problem.

~ Send merit more often to campaign participants because he see their campaign participants' posts every week

If the posts he will send merits to are quality posts, there's no problem. Besides, those campaign participants are still members of BTT and deserve ranking up.

If I look at campaigns that have merit source participants, usually those client accounts get more merit and rank up faster compared to campaigns that are not participated in by merit sources.

This is also not a problem, in as much as their posts are quality. The people that benefits from The Sceptical Chemist post review rank up than others, they are just lucky and it shouldn't bitter anyone.

[BlackHatCoiner]

The macro level is that if everyone has less sMerits and there were far fewer merit sources, the result of having less merit to go around would be that the responsibility on spotting and rewarding good posts increases.

And in that case, I'd be more careful with how much I spend. Maybe I stopped sending 4 merits to newbies for just sharing an interesting thought, and so would other merit sources. The result would rather be that high quality posters would just rank up more slowly.

Precisely because there's a lack of new users with good posts I believe that we don't need new merit sources.

How do you know we lack new users with good posts? I believe we had quite a lot new users who made their entrance in 2022-23, and ranked up pretty fast, as they were worth it. Shitposters, on the other hand, still find it difficult to rank up, as they should.

[alani123]

Precisely because there's a lack of new users with good posts I believe that we don't need new merit sources.

How do you know we lack new users with good posts? I believe we had quite a lot new users who made their entrance in 2022-23, and ranked up pretty fast, as they were worth it. Shitposters, on the other hand, still find it difficult to rank up, as they should.

This is highly subjective.

To me, a forum where tens of thousands of people are active posting very regularly like in here, should also be having an influx of new users that are able to contribute that is akin to its active userbase. That would be at least a few hundreds of new users becoming legendary every year. If we check https://bpip.org/Report?r=mostmerit there's only one legendary user in the top 1000 with a registration date of 2021 and 14 users from 2020. So in a little more than 3 years only 15 users reached the maximum rank. Also note that the bottom of the top 1000 have only a tiny bit merit above the required 1k to become legendary so I wouldn't guess that there's many more besides that.

I know this is an unorthodox way to check this but I can't find any better way to do so.

[LoyceV]

One more example, LoyceV managed the campaign a long time ago, and as far as I know he is still open to such offers. Do you doubt that he would abuse his merit source status by running a campaign?

I'd argue the opposite: a campaign manager is supposed to read many of the posts made in his campaigns. That's a great opportunity to Merit the good ones (and remove the users with bad posts from the campaign). That's not Merit abuse, it's doing a good job.
It may mean the campaign manager sends more Merit to users in his campaigns, because he reads more of their posts. But that shouldn't matter much, as there are 100+ other Merit sources too.

To call it Merit abuse, there should be something in it for the campaign manager. Unless you're going to the extremes of Meriting his own alts to join his own campaigns, I don't see that happening. Most campaign managers have earned enough sMerit to be able to do that without being a source anyway.

[nutildah]

To me, a forum where tens of thousands of people are active posting very regularly like in here, should also be having an influx of new users that are able to contribute that is akin to its active userbase. That would be at least a few hundreds of new users becoming legendary every year. If we check https://bpip.org/Report?r=mostmerit there's only one legendary user in the top 1000 with a registration date of 2021 and 14 users from 2020. So in a little more than 3 years only 15 users reached the maximum rank. Also note that the bottom of the top 1000 have only a tiny bit merit above the required 1k to become legendary so I wouldn't guess that there's many more besides that.

To become a Legendary w/ a 2021 registration date by now would mean posting just about every day (or at least 14 times per 2 weeks) since then, along with accumulating an average of ~1 merit every day... No easy feat really. It requires a lot of commitment to going beyond shitposting, which is a step most accounts here aren't willing to take. They are here because its "easy money"... once you have to put effort into it its no longer "easy" anymore. So they will never get beyond Sr. Member or Hero and they don't care.

I think it took me at least 4 years to get to Legendary based on the speed of my posting, which was intermittent. I don't think merits would have been a factor but who knows.

[Poker Player]

To me, a forum where tens of thousands of people are active posting very regularly like in here, should also be having an influx of new users that are able to contribute that is akin to its active userbase. That would be at least a few hundreds of new users becoming legendary every year. If we check https://bpip.org/Report?r=mostmerit there's only one legendary user in the top 1000 with a registration date of 2021 and 14 users from 2020. So in a little more than 3 years only 15 users reached the maximum rank. Also note that the bottom of the top 1000 have only a tiny bit merit above the required 1k to become legendary so I wouldn't guess that there's many more besides that.

To become a Legendary w/ a 2021 registration date by now would mean posting just about every day (or at least 14 times per 2 weeks) since then, along with accumulating an average of ~1 merit every day... No easy feat really. It requires a lot of commitment to going beyond shitposting, which is a step most accounts here aren't willing to take. They are here because its "easy money"... once you have to put effort into it its no longer "easy" anymore. So they will never get beyond Sr. Member or Hero and they don't care.

I think it took me at least 4 years to get to Legendary based on the speed of my posting, which was intermittent. I don't think merits would have been a factor but who knows.

I am surprised by this data, which I did not know, as I registered in 2020 and I would say I was legendary last year (is there any way to check?). Although I write better than a shitposter I am not among the most exceptional posters but according to that data I would be among a minority of the best posters who registered the same year as me. That said, with some exceptions, I usually write 7 days a week.

[FatFork]

I am surprised by this data, which I did not know, as I registered in 2020 and I would say I was legendary last year (is there any way to check?).

According to the DdmrDdmr's Merit Dashboard, you were promoted to Legendary rank sometime in early December 2022:

Poker Player             -> Legendary from New Era Newbie during Merit System kick-off.

[Etranger]

Precisely because there's a lack of new users with good posts I believe that we don't need new merit sources. At this point in my opinion new merit sources should only happen if less active ones are removed and their sMerits rescinded. When forum activity from new users goes down merit sources should ideally decrease, not increase.

It implies that you consider merit sources necessary only for the development and encouragement of newbies. But they evaluate other ranks in exactly the same way. And it cannot be said that beginners need merits more than higher ranks. Moreover, the forum does not become a less active and interesting place because there are no motivated newbies writing quality posts. I personally find it more interesting to observe the development of those members who have already walked a certain path here, and who value this experience and skills acquired at the forum. For me it is more important rather than to look for newbies, trying to lure them with merit for some repetitive questions.

[alani123]

Precisely because there's a lack of new users with good posts I believe that we don't need new merit sources. At this point in my opinion new merit sources should only happen if less active ones are removed and their sMerits rescinded. When forum activity from new users goes down merit sources should ideally decrease, not increase.

It implies that you consider merit sources necessary only for the development and encouragement of newbies. But they evaluate other ranks in exactly the same way. And it cannot be said that beginners need merits more than higher ranks. Moreover, the forum does not become a less active and interesting place because there are no motivated newbies writing quality posts. I personally find it more interesting to observe the development of those members who have already walked a certain path here, and who value this experience and skills acquired at the forum. For me it is more important rather than to look for newbies, trying to lure them with merit for some repetitive questions.

Judging merit by its intended function isn't something bad, is it? Of course there's also other acceptable reasons to give merit. When there's an oversupply of something we become less caring about how we spend it. Much like with USD. A car used to be 500 USD. However as governments keep printing more, numbers become meaningless. A handful of people have thousands of merits, which isn't a bad thing really.

The odd thing here is that there's a very distinct lack of new posters with valuable information in this forum. And the question that arises here is if there's good enough reason to justify adding more merit sources if this situation persists.

[KingsDen]

Precisely because there's a lack of new users with good posts I believe that we don't need new merit sources. At this point in my opinion new merit sources should only happen if less active ones are removed and their sMerits rescinded. When forum activity from new users goes down merit sources should ideally decrease, not increase.

It implies that you consider merit sources necessary only for the development and encouragement of newbies. But they evaluate other ranks in exactly the same way. And it cannot be said that beginners need merits more than higher ranks. Moreover, the forum does not become a less active and interesting place because there are no motivated newbies writing quality posts. I personally find it more interesting to observe the development of those members who have already walked a certain path here, and who value this experience and skills acquired at the forum. For me it is more important rather than to look for newbies, trying to lure them with merit for some repetitive questions.

Although merits are needed for ranking up, but i think that theymos idea of merit is different from how it is working. Theymos idea of merit does not differentiate a newbie from a legendary member. The merit giver doesn't necessarily need to know the name of the user he is issuing merit to let alone the rank, but strictly on the quality of the post. If a legendary member makes 20 quality posts, those posts could all receive merits while a newbie who made 200 non quality post might not recieve even 1 merit. That is the merit system.

However, the merit sources are not machines, so they have conscience and that is why they see things differently and subjectively. Some at times give priority to newbies while others have high standards and keep recycling the merits among those they think make the quality posts.

[Bitcoinsummoner]

To become a Legendary w/ a 2021 registration date by now would mean posting just about every day (or at least 14 times per 2 weeks) since then, along with accumulating an average of ~1 merit every day... No easy feat really. It requires a lot of commitment to going beyond shitposting, which is a step most accounts here aren't willing to take. They are here because its "easy money"... once you have to put effort into it its no longer "easy" anymore. So they will never get beyond Sr. Member or Hero and they don't care.

I think it took me at least 4 years to get to Legendary based on the speed of my posting, which was intermittent. I don't think merits would have been a factor but who knows.

Your analysis provides a valuable perspective on the journey to reach Legendary status. It's important that reaching such a milestone requires consistent dedication and a willingness to contribute meaningfully. If one user honestly wants to reach the targeted figure then it will be possible for him but if users can't gather much knowledge about the forum with current news about the cryptocurrency then obviously the users will fail to reach that figure.

[Etranger]

Although merits are needed for ranking up, but i think that theymos idea of merit is different from how it is working. Theymos idea of merit does not differentiate a newbie from a legendary member. The merit giver doesn't necessarily need to know the name of the user he is issuing merit to let alone the rank, but strictly on the quality of the post. If a legendary member makes 20 quality posts, those posts could all receive merits while a newbie who made 200 non quality post might not recieve even 1 merit. That is the merit system.

However, the merit sources are not machines, so they have conscience and that is why they see things differently and subjectively. Some at times give priority to newbies while others have high standards and keep recycling the merits among those they think make the quality posts.

A situation where merits are given regardless of the recipient's rank is simply impossible. And I don't see how that could be considered the original idea of the merit system. We all see each other's rank and the amount of merit we have. And all this information influence the decision of sending merits. Even when a person decides to give merit to someone, he often takes into account who exactly wrote a quality post, and may give more merits to the post written by a newbie, for example, than for the same post written by a legendary, because he believes that making quality posts is harder for a newbie than for someone who is already familiar with forum. Or, on the contrary, a person sends significantly more merits to a hero or legendary, although he does not need them to increase the rank, simply because he thinks that the higher the rank, the more merits the post written by this user deserves. If the idea was to make a merit system independent of rank and the subjective opinion that arises because of the user's rank, then it would be logical to hide the rank. And so it is available to everyone, everybody see the rank of every other user and, of course, it affects the decision to send merits.

[paid2]

--snip--

--snip--

We already have an active topic on the matter: Should Merit-Sources send merit based on their feelings or quality of the post?

[kuriboh]

One more example, LoyceV managed the campaign a long time ago, and as far as I know he is still open to such offers. Do you doubt that he would abuse his merit source status by running a campaign?

I'd argue the opposite: a campaign manager is supposed to read many of the posts made in his campaigns. That's a great opportunity to Merit the good ones (and remove the users with bad posts from the campaign). That's not Merit abuse, it's doing a good job.
It may mean the campaign manager sends more Merit to users in his campaigns, because he reads more of their posts. But that shouldn't matter much, as there are 100+ other Merit sources too.

To call it Merit abuse, there should be something in it for the campaign manager. Unless you're going to the extremes of Meriting his own alts to join his own campaigns, I don't see that happening. Most campaign managers have earned enough sMerit to be able to do that without being a source anyway.

Yes, I agree with your counterargument. A campaigner should read all posts made in his campaign very carefully. Many campaigning roles are avoided because his campaign is about campaigning. It's not that they don't see the post, but since they work on the campaign, they should read every post very well. Those who post good quality are already qualified, but for them, this is a golden opportunity from which they can quickly move ahead with qualification.

To me, a forum where tens of thousands of people are active posting very regularly like in here, should also be having an influx of new users that are able to contribute that is akin to its active userbase. That would be at least a few hundreds of new users becoming legendary every year. If we check https://bpip.org/Report?r=mostmerit there's only one legendary user in the top 1000 with a registration date of 2021 and 14 users from 2020. So in a little more than 3 years only 15 users reached the maximum rank. Also note that the bottom of the top 1000 have only a tiny bit merit above the required 1k to become legendary so I wouldn't guess that there's many more besides that.

To become a Legendary w/ a 2021 registration date by now would mean posting just about every day (or at least 14 times per 2 weeks) since then, along with accumulating an average of ~1 merit every day... No easy feat really. It requires a lot of commitment to going beyond shitposting, which is a step most accounts here aren't willing to take. They are here because its "easy money"... once you have to put effort into it its no longer "easy" anymore. So they will never get beyond Sr. Member or Hero and they don't care.

I think it took me at least 4 years to get to Legendary based on the speed of my posting, which was intermittent. I don't think merits would have been a factor but who knows.

I am very happy to see your post today. When I came here, the rules were straightforward. I came here in 2013, but my days have been greatly destroyed. Now that my physical condition is a little better, I came back after facing many problems. Had my status not deteriorated, my status on this forum would have been on the side of legend.
There are many rules now, which is a lovely aspect of the forum. Accordingly, good things can still be done in the forum. To become a legend, he needs to have that mindset. No one became a legend in a day in the forum; you have to work for it, only in the right way. It is possible, but it is not possible.
You started your journey in this forum in 2014 and gave everyone a lot of reasonable effort. It is possible because of tireless work. It took you 4 years, but it all depends on his attendance and how active he is. With your help, we will reach a good position ahead.

[nutildah]

I apologize for the off-topic, but this guy's continual lying bothers me a lot:

I came here in 2013

No, you did not. You bought this account and then started copy/pasting ChatGPT for your posts. Someone claiming to be the original owner even bothered to protest because your posts are so remarkably bad:

I can confirm that account is stoled, It was my old account that I dont have access anymore, I dont know how long my account has been stoled. I can confirm it by old mails and proofs, I dont want my old account back, i dont care tbh, but i dont want anyone to impersonate me.

If you can check my 2013 writing to this writing now is clear its not the same person, bc I was the old owner.

You should absolutely be banned.

Clear use of chatbot services that should result in a ban right away.

User: kuriboh

Copy:

I think Bitcoin is a dynamic and evolving digital asset, subject to price fluctuations, regulatory developments, and technological advancements, as of my most recent knowledge update in January 2024.

...

These are my own writings now how do I know someone else is posting the same give a link to any other post that matches my post.
...

 


To bring things back on topic, I am officially endorsing icopress as a merit source and support his application.